Steady State Responses to Multiple Amplitude-Modulated Tones: An Optimized Method to Test Frequency-Specific Thresholds in Hearing-Impaired Children and Normal-Hearing Subjects

Pérez-Abalo, María C.; Savio, Guillermo; Torres, Alejandro; Martin, Vivian; Rodríguez, E.; Galán, Lı́dice

doi:10.1097/00003446-200106000-00004

Cited by 146 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarities in the side or ears -as noted in the present study -have also been reported in the literature 7,[23][24][25] . In the complete series (n = 72 ears) the mean minimum response was 32.4 dBnHL (52.4 dBSPL) at 2 kHz for tone burst ABR in the term and preterm groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Auditory evoked potentials in premature and full-term infants

Porto¹,

Azevedo²,

Gil³

2011

Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurat e information about type, degree, and configuration of hearing loss are necessary for successful audiological early interventions. Auditory brainstem response with tone burst stimuli (TB ABR) and auditory steady-state response (ASSR) exams provide this information. Aim:To analyze the clinical applicability of TB ABR and ASSR at 2 kHz in infants, comparing responses in full-term and premature neonates. Material and Method:The study was cross-sectional, clinical and experimental. Subjects consisted of 17 premature infants and 19 full-term infants. TB ABR and ASSR exams at 2000 Hz were done during natural sleep. Results:The electrophysiological minimum response obtained with TB ABR was 32.4 dBnHL (52.4 dBSPL); the ASSR minimum was 13.8 dBHL (26.4 dBSPL). The exams required 21.1 min and 22 min, respectively. Premature and full-term infant responses showed no statistically significant differences, except for auditory steady-state response duration. Conclusions:Both exams have clinical applicability at 2 kHz in infants, with 20 min of duration, on average. In general, there are no differences between premature and full-term individuals. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;77(5):622-7. BJORL ORIGINAL ARTICLE

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Auditory evoked potentials in premature and full-term infants

Porto¹,

Azevedo²,

Gil³

2011

Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was confirmed by the correlation coefficients indicating significantly poorer correlation between behavioural and ASSR thresholds at 0.5 kHz (r=0.31) compared to a high degree of correlation for 1 -4 kHz regions (0.74 -0.88). Although the correlations for the higher frequencies are in close agreement with previously published reports the poor correlation for the 0.5 kHz thresholds are lower than those reported previously [1,4,5,9). This difference may be accounted for to a large extent by the fact that the current sample was confined to moderate hearing losses containing a number of thresholds in the mild hearing loss region for which the ASSR has demonstrated poorer accuracy [8,11,12].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Auditory steady-state responses for estimating moderate hearing loss

Swanepoel

Erasmus

2007

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

KEYWORDSAuditory steady-state response, objective frequency-specific audiometry, sensorineural hearing loss, ABSTRACTThe Auditory Steady-State Response (ASSR) has gained popularity as an alternative technique for objective audiometry but its use in less severe degrees of hearing loss has been questioned. The aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of the ASSR in estimating moderate degrees of hearing loss. Seven subjects (12 ears) with moderate sensorineural hearing loss between 15 and 18 years of ages were enrolled in the study. 48 behavioural and ASSR thresholds were obtained across the frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. ASSR thresholds were determined using a dichotic multiple frequency recording technique. Mean threshold differences varied between 2 and 8 dB (±7-10 dB SD) across frequencies. The highest difference and variability was recorded at 0.5 kHz. The frequencies 1 -4 kHz also revealed significantly better correlations (0.74 -0.88) compared to 0.5 kHz (0.31). Comparing correlation coefficients for behavioural thresholds less than 60 dB and 60 dB and higher revealed a significant difference. 86% of ASSR thresholds corresponded within 5 dB of moderate to severe behavioural thresholds compared to only 29% for mild to moderate thresholds in this study. The results confirm that the ASSR can reliably estimated behavioural thresholds of 60 dB and higher, but due to increased variability caution is recommended when estimating behavioural thresholds of less than 60 dB, especially at 0.5 kHz.

show abstract

“…Such differences, smaller than those obtained in the present study, were expected in view of the fact that adolescents or children with hearing loss respond better in tonal audiometry 15 when compared to young children with conductive loss.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 74%

Visual Reinforcement Audiometry and Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential in infants with and without conductive impairment

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: to compare the findings of minimum levels of answers through air and bone conductions between the Visual Reinforcement Audiometry and the Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential in infants from six to twelve months, with and without conductive disorder. Methods: sixty children aged six to twelve months were evaluated, 30 presenting conductive disorder, and 30 not presenting it. Children with malformation in the external auditory meatus with neurological alteration and / or genetic syndrome were excluded, as well as patients with sensorineural or mixed hearing loss. The infants were subjected to Visual Reinforcement Audiometry and Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential evaluation through air and bone conduction on the same day. The results of both assessments were compared and correlated. Results: in the comparison through air conduction, for the group without conductive disorder of the medium ear, the minimum levels of response for 500 and 1000Hz were lower (better thresholds) for Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential in both ears, and through bone conduction were very similar in all frequencies. Concerning the infants that present conductive disorder, the responses through air conduction were better in all frequencies evaluated when obtained via Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential test. Through bone conduction, the results were very similar for both groups. Conclusion: it was possible to compare the findings to the minimum levels of response through air and bone conductions between the Visual Reinforcement Audiometry and the Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential, being that the comparison for bone conduction in both groups presents an equivalence in the results, being very similar. In addition, for the air conduction, in the control group, there was proximity of responses of some frequencies, while the values for the Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential test were better than the behavioral responses in the conductive disorder group.

show abstract

Steady State Responses to Multiple Amplitude-Modulated Tones: An Optimized Method to Test Frequency-Specific Thresholds in Hearing-Impaired Children and Normal-Hearing Subjects

Cited by 146 publications

References 21 publications

Auditory evoked potentials in premature and full-term infants

Auditory evoked potentials in premature and full-term infants

Auditory steady-state responses for estimating moderate hearing loss

Visual Reinforcement Audiometry and Steady-State Auditory Evoked Potential in infants with and without conductive impairment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About